Subjects

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Rising to the Bait - Senator Michael Noland

Rising to the Bait (Sen. Michael Nolan on
HB6258)

Idiom: Rising to the bait describes the
response to a temptation or enticement exactly as planned or intended. The colloquialism is also used to describe
the acceptance of an offer that proves a trick or quite the opposite of what
was expected.

In a progressive talk radio program last weekend, Senator
Michael Noland of Elgin talked openly about the current proposals made by Rep.
Elaine Nekritz and twenty other legislators in HB6258. You’ll remember that
Sen. Noland was originally a member of Governor Quinn’s committee designated early
last spring to forge a path to pension reform that would include all
stakeholders. The governor’s Director of
Management and Budget Jerry Stermer also sat in on the group. The result was proposal of choices in benefit
reductions (B1673) that was hot-potatoed between Madigan and Cross and failed
to receive a vote (but remains alive). The sticking point was the proposed cost shift
to local districts.

Now, HB6258 puts
forth a number of alterations to the current public teachers’ pension program,
many which would be immediately challenged in court. These include increased contributions without
benefit increases, severe restriction of the COLA for future and current retirees,
a cost shift to the local districts, the change to a cash balance plan, etc. The proposal is Representative Nekritz and Representative
Biss’ “new normal” for pension reform.

Although Sen. Nolan’s interpretation of the “new normal”
means “those already hired should be the least harmed,” he considered this
latest and more draconian proposal put forth by the younger group of twenty-one
a show of frustration as well as a “show of her (Nekrtiz) consideration of
leadership.” Indeed, while
Representative Senger, Senator Brady, and Rep. Noland have seemingly stepped
back, Representative Nekritz has become the prominent figure in moving her own agenda
to make pension reform happen.

Although Noland stated he needed time to “review the (proposed) legislation before I
can comment in detail,” he did express qualms about forcing change rather than
offering choices in future legislation regarding pension reform. Holding onto the original senatorial view
expressed last spring by Leader Cullerton and others, Noland feels that “we
cannot do this (pension reform) without their willingness to accept
change.” There are the public sector
unions or their representatives. Noland
holds to the legal position that providing a choice would increase the
likelihood of passing a later legal challenge.
“Stakeholders need to be willing to sacrifice so that others can have a
job.” Although heretofore neither public
sector unions nor their representatives have been called to the table during
the genesis of HB6258, Noland obviously feels their presence necessary. Necessary to have them agree to concessions.

The enticement or bait this time (HB6258) is the promise to pay the annual cost of TRS
pensions. According to TRS, “If the state does not pay its annual
contribution to TRS within a set period of time, TRS could go to court to force
the state to pay the contribution in the same way that the Illinois Municipal
Retirement Fund can force local governments to pay their contributions” (http://trs.illinois.gov/subsections/press/PensionReformProposals.htm
).

On the other hand, given the eventual if not possible
inclusion of the shift of costs to local school districts integral to this and
other legislation, sue whom? The state
or the local districts? And of course,
this time the state’s promise carries more validity than it did for each of the
last 60 years?

Mr. Noland’s emphasis on choices adheres
to Chief Legal Counsel Eric Madiar’s position that compliance with the Illinois
Constitution depends upon a selection of options, even if such seems coercive
(you will remember the choice between health care and COLA’s). One could therefore attempt to describe a
selection as willing or negotiated, especially if given sanction by
stakeholders at the table.

As Ellen Schultz warns in Retirement Heist, offering options is a ploy used in the private
sector quite successfully. “To enhance
their chances at success, some companies started to use a strategy…creeping
take-aways.“ This involves taking small
steps – increase premiums a small amount, or perhaps start charging premiums in
the future. The retirees and unions
ignore them. Then, a few years later,
the company cuts benefits in a big way, saying that the retiree’s prior lack of
legal action signaled tacit agreement that the company could change the plan.”

Like the creation of a committee with many axes to grind,
HB6258 is a vast array of punishments for public teachers – current, retired
and future. Its design displays little
regard for stakeholders or for promises.
Listening to Rep. Cassidy’s delusional explanation of how selective
cutting of COLA’s will protect the truly deserving retirees was wretched. BUT HB6258,
like its predecessors and successors, does contain the bait offering a
deal.

Let’s hope that our stakeholders realize just how dangerous any inducement will be.

About Me

I am a retiree, political activist, social advocate and community volunteer. I taught at Lyons Township High School in LaGrange for 34 years in the Language Arts classroom and worked as an administrator for several years. My current avocations include various community outreach and assistance programs. Having benefitted from employment in a collegial, reflective teaching environment that encouraged dedication and professionalism, I continue to seek the promotion of education at all levels as a long-term effort combining talent, perseverance, commitment, and constant professional growth - not a blind adherence to a business model of measured production.

Copyrights & Fair Use

This blog contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of issues vital to a democracy. I believe this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law.